I think a lot of the narrative in AI is way excessively geared towards input ÷ knowledge corpus = some sort of probability weighted outcome = action.

The human brain is specifically designed to INSTANTLY DISCARD certain information the evolutionary process has deemed superfluous whereas most AI involves computational assessment of everything. In thinking over the operational architecture we might code to arrive at awareness, is it not just as important to pre-filter the perception algo to disregard irrelevant as it is to appraise relevant?

If you structured the command architecture so all input variables were either contingent on each other or disregarded, wouldn't that yeild a better result?

Sorry if I'm failing at explaining whats in my mind,.

Last edited by ObeseHighschoolDropoutFelon @ 11/21/2014 9:10:00 PM

tkorrovi

posted 11/22/2014 13:05

Yes you are right, discarding and removing inconsistent data is equally important.

And you may find more such things, but, as someone said here, they don't want AI that has free will. One more reason i would say is that making an AI that has free will would show that humans have free will. And that says it all.

The sensory input would have to flow in such a way that upon input/conversion to code, each recognized variable would then have to be reconciled against fixed command parametrics and then either retained as situationaly relevant (per onboard knowledge corpus) or discarded in order for the ai to operate with intent.

Do you think that a bucket sort framework is an appropriate way to store input on the fly to be used as commands?

It seems to me that the shape of the data sorting, is as important as anything else, since most of the functions are at least loosely contingent. If you look at how the brain works, there's a lot of economy in neural transmission that is obviously because of interrelated functions impelling certain behaviors (for example, anxiety plays centralized role in all sorts of seemingly unrelated motivations, but all impelled by the same brain region)

Last edited by ObeseHighschoolDropoutFelon @ 11/22/2014 8:35:00 PM

tkorrovi

posted 11/22/2014 21:06

Its a changing network. One may assume that its whatever, but then it again comes out that its a changing network. A network with changing structure.

There are certain parameters that are fixed, though, and that won't ever change assuming the ai entity is to exist with purpose.

In the case of natural beings, survival and breeding tend to underpin the involuntary mechanisms in the 'control box' (ie, brain) and those never change. Everything is extrapolated from that and interpreted from that vantage.

If we quantified 'purpose' of the AI in the form of a tail variable command, that would allow all the on the fly input that came ahead of it to reconcile against predictable and reliable operating parameters.

So, lets say that I want to make an ai butcher that not only butchers hogs but farms them and slaughters them. Its not too hard figuring out what input it would need to exist semi-autonomously but say the concern was some Sci Fi scenario where the robot hog butcher received erratic input and mistakenly learned its intent was to round up and butcher human beings (I smell a movie...)

As long as the algorithm that translated input into action had clear tail parameters towards the end of the string that were resolute, there would be little to no risk of misinterpretation since all input would be reconciled against fixed parameters instead of contingent variables (that are near impossible to predict, as we see in the stock market).

tkorrovi

posted 11/23/2014 01:59

ObeseHighschoolDropoutFelon wrote @ 11/23/2014 1:14:00 AM:
In the case of natural beings, survival and breeding tend to underpin the involuntary mechanisms in the 'control box' (ie, brain) and those never change. Everything is extrapolated from that and interpreted from that vantage.

This is what you are made to believe, you may not know how much more you are made to believe, which isn't true. No, the inherent goal is achieving more harmony with the environment. This is inherent, not pre-determined. This is similar to survival, so it is presented as survival, but there is a subtle but important difference. This is distorting the reality, making it much more primitive than it is.

Im not sure if making it self aware is of importance yet, when there needs to be some prior advancement, to make a worthwhile goal right now.

with a wiener filter (serious, you can look it up) you can build a model of a sensor using only its sensor history as the clue. Just imagine it spewing out parallel chains of symbols, it copied off its environment. It doesnt matter how many symbols there are, just chews em up and spits em out whatever it is.
People using that as a stock market predictor is a scary thing, then you could possibly build many parallel wiener filters even scanning each others histories, for possible correlations.

That way you can now play back the sensor (could be any datastream) and its a simulatable model.

So its 'a' model, but it has no logic. Its similar to Hiearchical temporal memory. (the temporal component anyway.) Has no logic.

Look up prolog or 'logic programming paradigm' and youll see there is thinking at making a more sensical 'model' But... there is many more things to be thought about after you just read what usually is done. (But a good teacher will show you im pretty that any program can be written in the logic paradigm, for benefits or not, when writing it.)

It comes down to asserts (like david is michaels son), and rules on asserts. (fathers love their children.) therefore -> michael loves david, and any other father and son relationship, a rule will make knowledge faster, than asserting it all piece at a time.

You have to make the asserts and rules automatically, from the sensor input, you arent allowed to type them into it, for it be closer to intelligence.

If you have a model, depends on how correct the model is, how intelligent your robot would be if it used it... and the model has to be in a form where it will drive its behaviour.

Simple as hell. Understand my method, and its definitely NOT alive, and its definitely a bit of crazy personality.

Last edited by rouncer @ 11/23/2014 4:50:00 AM

tkorrovi

posted 11/23/2014 08:47

Modeling happens by input, and also by how the input depends on the output. Statistical models such as wiener filter, don't really model the process, or they are very limited models.

Last edited by tkorrovi @ 11/23/2014 8:49:00 AM

rouncer

posted 11/23/2014 14:44

im yet to come up with my new fav way to model temporally.
there is no need for logic without time. ;)

First frame, NN one learns the image then saves the weight matrix. And NN
structure is saved too.
Second frame, NN_2 learns the image and saves the weight matrix and so and so on up
to 1000 or more NN in sequence of the race car video.

Next turn a new kind of NN sideways to feed in the
output of the sequential NN of a certain length of your own choosing, in
one go. Like maybe 10 frame worth. Of any section of the video. This done
to deal with all your temporal dealings in CNN fashion.

ObeseHighschoolDropoutFelon

posted 11/23/2014 20:19

tkorrovi wrote @ 11/23/2014 1:59:00 AM:
This is what you are made to believe, you may not know how much more you are made to believe, which isn't true. No, the inherent goal is achieving more harmony with the environment. This is inherent, not pre-determined. This is similar to survival, so it is presented as survival, but there is a subtle but important difference. This is distorting the reality, making it much more primitive than it is.

There is nothing inherent to our biological mechanisms that indicate 'achieving harmony with the environment' is in our hard-wiring. There are some biological indicators about socialization and things of that nature, but as a species we still level ground to build giant skyscrapers and there's nothing in our brains that viscerally reacts to that in the same way as seeing a naked lady or a big plate of food. Ideologically maybe, but ideology is an arbitrary social construct with no association to our neurological mechanisms.

ObeseHighschoolDropoutFelon

posted 11/23/2014 21:13

rouncer wrote @ 11/23/2014 4:25:00 AM:

It comes down to asserts (like david is michaels son), and rules on asserts. (fathers love their children.) therefore -> michael loves david, and any other father and son relationship, a rule will make knowledge faster, than asserting it all piece at a time.

You have to make the asserts and rules automatically, from the sensor input, you arent allowed to type them into it, for it be closer to intelligence.

This is along the lines of what I'm talking about.

You are right, its tempting to get far flung and theoretical but there still is a lot of practical work that has to be done to get there.

Assertions can still have contingent variables and remain within a conventional logical flowage thus allowing the ai entity to think with more nuance.

David is Michaels son and Fathers love Sons.

Once we quantify love, father and son, if there's enough dynamism in the definition corpus, its entirely possible to allow for fathers love sons *almost always, but for*.

One of the struggles with ai qualitative perception is that everything is imperfect but algorithms demand rules that flow linearly. If we reshaped the command algo from the much more conventional 'if X then Y but not if Z' into a series of autonomous commands that ask interrelated questions and then surmise based on probability, wouldn't that be much closer to how humans actually think?

I think some people are going about it wrong.

tkorrovi

posted 11/24/2014 06:17

ObeseHighschoolDropoutFelon wrote @ 11/23/2014 8:19:00 PM:
There is nothing inherent to our biological mechanisms that indicate 'achieving harmony with the environment' is in our hard-wiring.

Yes there is. When the system is unrestricted, in its self-development, then it is able to find all possibilities, that is also the right ones, and is able to adapt to the environment. How it happens, just by multiple drafts principle, of Daniel Dennett's, basically only that which fits into the environment, survives. The same also provides going further from a newer level, not starting from the beginning again, so notice that it's not "natural selection". It's self-development going further from where it is, instead of random mutations. What generates these "drafts", is self-development, it inherently does that. But a lot of flexibility is necessary, so that the right structures (developing structures) for all occurring circumstances, can be generated. Thus it's inherent, to the basic mechanism that provides the self-development, provided that the self-development provides enough flexibility.

All i want, is that someone would go one step ahead in research, from where i ended. Just a single small step, should not be that difficult. No need for fancy systems doing great things, just one small step forward in research. But it doesn't happen, all get distracted, without ever reaching the boundary, of what i found out. Which is not that terribly much, like i have explained all that repeatedly in this forum.

Tkorovi... so these multiple drafts are then slowly all contradicted as they cause pain to the creature? So i guess the problem is, is how to make the infinite amount of drafts, not the amount is the problem, just how to make one at all, that isnt just randomizing them.

Im stuck in my own problem, that im stuck trying to copy it in from the sensor, for the robot to 'emulate the environment' instead of using it as knowledge for it to calculate the solution.

But thats what I want for my new model.

tkorrovi

posted 11/24/2014 18:39

rouncer wrote @ 11/24/2014 1:57:00 PM:
just how to make one at all, that isnt just randomizing them.

That's self-development. In my case, it is the general basic mechanism. But a model can self-develop too, when there are rules for self-development.

What may make it look so impossible, is when you use a restricted model. Like neural network, it doesn't self-develop, kind of, what it has learned, it cannot go further from that. Like when learning to recognize a different shape, it kind of has to start from zero every time. It is because this is how it is made, self-development is not provided.

Someone many years ago, btw, made a neural network that grows new nodes, based on my system. Also posted it here. But, growing that network did not help to develop the network further, it was growth for the sake of growth.

But yes exactly, the problem is how to make the system flexible enough, so that it can even make a single draft.

boundary, of what i http://www.mmo2k.com/fifa-coins.html/ found out. Which is not that terribly much, like i have explained all that repeatedly in this forum.

Last edited by millokfifa @ 1/9/2015 10:10:00 AM

Ravindra

posted 6/26/2015 08:08

ObeseHighschoolDropoutFelon wrote @ 11/21/2014 9:08:00 PM:
I think a lot of the narrative in AI is way excessively geared towards input ÷ knowledge corpus = some sort of probability weighted outcome = action.

The human brain is specifically designed to INSTANTLY DISCARD certain information the evolutionary process has deemed superfluous whereas most AI involves computational assessment of everything. In thinking over the operational architecture we might code to arrive at awareness, is it not just as important to pre-filter the perception algo to disregard irrelevant as it is to appraise relevant?

If you structured the command architecture so all input variables were either contingent on each other or disregarded, wouldn't that yeild a better result?

Sorry if I'm failing at explaining whats in my mind,.

if you have knowledge its in store but the daily activity is generated by Daily present what you are thinking of every one in your mind ,and your attitude with them result in daily activity.All this is controlled through mind.

tkorrovi

posted 6/27/2015 07:04

Ravindra wrote @ 6/26/2015 8:08:00 AM:
All this is controlled through mind.

Mind which by you doesn't exist, is just complexity, nihilism. And yet you still use that word.